Reifman v. Micon

207 Ill. App. 175
Appellate Court of Illinois·Decided July 11, 1917·No. Gen. No. 22,198·Published

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice Goodwin

delivered the opinion of the court.

3. Assumpsit, Action of, § 56* — -when agent not deemed to have received money for the use of another. An agent for the purchasers of land who receives the initial payment from his clients cannot be deemed to have received money for the use of the sellers under a contract for the sale of land, where" he received it for the purpose of depositing it with a certain bank, which, in turn, was to hold it for the mutual benefit of the parties concerned, and the agent returned the money to the principal.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Reifman v. Micon, 207 Ill. App. 175 (Ill. Ct. App. 1917).

207 Ill. App. 175 (Reifman v. Micon) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.